W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > April 2011

Re: RDF Recommendation Set comments (re agenda for 6th April)

From: William Waites <ww@styx.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 19:40:27 +0200
To: Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <20110407174027.GL21404@styx.org>
* [2011-04-07 12:28:03 -0400] Peter Frederick Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com> écrit:

] Yes, if you can derive contradictions in RDFS all by itself then nothing
] from OWL needs to be added to RDFS to be able to derive contractions
] in the extended RDFS.

Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was, to derive
useful contradictions from real data. It isn't clear to me
that the pathological examples would appear in real data
and the one example I've seen of a useful contradiction
relies on xsd reasoning.

So you're strictly correct, but it isn't a very useful or
interesting result in my opinion.

William Waites                <mailto:ww@styx.org>
http://river.styx.org/ww/        <sip:ww@styx.org>
F4B3 39BF E775 CF42 0BAB  3DF0 BE40 A6DF B06F FD45
Received on Thursday, 7 April 2011 17:40:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:58 UTC